FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

Dr. Charles Jacobs is a longtime anti-slavery and pro-Israel activist, one of the founders of CAMERA and the American Anti-Slavery Group (AASG). He has also been a persistent critic of the ADL, arguing that it concentrates way too much on ‘old-fashioned’ neo-Nazi antisemitism and not enough on threats from Islamists and the extreme Left. What I found interesting in a recent exchange was this:

Shifting the focus away from skinheads, neo-Nazis, and Christian bigots and onto radical leftists and Muslim Jew-hatred would be extraordinarily difficult. It would require a massive and unpopular effort: leading the Jews to think difficult thoughts about their new situation, thoughts that put them at odds with their comforting universalist theology of Political Correctness. And it would be costly: ADL would forfeit loads of leftwing money – and its liberal bona fides. The organization would hardly ever get a letter published in The New York Times. It would be viciously attacked by Islamist leadership. CAIR would be relentless. Abe Foxman, ADL’s head, acknowledges that Islamic Jew hatred is the biggest threat we face (he’s still shy about the radical left)  – yet ADL spends much, much more time, effort, resources and focus on the older, less dangerous threats while practically ignoring the new, more ominous ones.

The problem he touches on is not just an issue for Jews and Israel. The taboos of political correctness (PC) applied to anything connected with Islam or Muslims have the Orwellian effect of making it impossible to describe the motivating force of the great majority of armed conflicts in progress today, or even the future of Western civilization.

PC says that one may not criticize a religion or a group of individuals characterized by a religion. Someone who does that is accused of practicing hate and is called a bigot. Haters and bigots are considered the morally defective dregs of humanity, and anything one of them says can be ignored. Hitler and Bull Connor are common examples of bigots, and the Holocaust of the European Jews is used as a cautionary tale about the wages of hate.

On the other hand, it is considered entirely legitimate to attack ideologies or political or economic systems in the most vicious terms possible. It is even permissible to exaggerate and lie when doing so, because “it’s politics.” Marxism, Capitalism, Communism, Fascism, Zionism, etc. are fair game.

Probably the trauma of slavery and institutionalized racism in the US and the Holocaust in Europe had something to do with the development of the shibboleths of PC, which even have the force of law in many nations. PC can be understood as an attempt to root out the darker aspects of our culture that allowed these atrocities to happen.

PC distorts the truth, and doesn’t even achieve its intended goals. Direct expressions of Jew-hatred in the developed world have been severely limited by PC. But, unfortunately, the same feelings are now expressed as rage against Zionism or Israel, entities not protected by PC rules. Unacceptable Jew-hatred evolved into ‘normal’ Israel-hatred. Today, the inevitable reaction against PC is bringing back traditional antisemitism as well.

Islam is more than just a set of religious beliefs. The main texts of Islam also include a legal system and a political ideology. What we call ‘political Islam’, ‘militant Islam’ or ‘Islamism’ is the attempted actualization of the political ideology of Mohammad — a highly particularist, aggressive and warlike one — in today’s world.

As a political ideology, and an unfriendly one at that, it is essential that we have the ability to learn about, to discuss, and to criticize it. But the position of the major Muslim organizations in the US, the Obama Administration, the ADL, most politicians and political organizations of the Center and Left, most academics, etc. is that the rules of PC forbid this. This has led to such absurdities as a government dictate that official discussions of terrorism must not use the word ‘jihad’, although most present-day terrorism is in fact perpetrated under the banner of jihad!

Part of the ideology of political Islam is that the Islamic legal system, Shari’a, must be applied to Muslims and of course to countries under Islamic control. Principles of Shari’a directly contradict our modern views about the equality of all people, regardless of gender or religion. Shari’a is all about a pervasive hierarchy of rights and privileges given to Muslim  men, women, Jews and Christians, and others. Conflict is guaranteed when Islamists become a sizable minority in a liberal culture, as is becoming apparent in the UK and other European countries.

It is necessary and possible for non-Muslims to learn to understand the principles of political Islam and Shari’a. It is not inappropriate to criticize their application to unbelievers and women.

It’s way past time to distinguish the religious and political parts of Islam.

Technorati Tags: Islam, political correctness, ADL, Charles Jacobs

Delegation of left-wing Israelis visits damaged Tuba Zangaria mosque to 'make amends'. But what if it was torched by Arabs?

I have written about how the so-called ‘price tag’ actions have been a goldmine for anti-Israel propaganda. Although there seem to have been a few cases where vandals were actually caught, in others it seems as though the police have simply “rounded up the usual [right-wing activist] suspects.” After a burst of publicity about how they are doing their job, they are forced to release them for lack of actual evidence.

We know that the manufacturing of Israeli ‘crimes’ is a cottage industry for Palestinians. There was the notorious case of Mohammed Dura, the ‘Jenin massacre‘ in which nobody was massacred, the Gaza Beach incident (where navy ships allegedly fired on Palestinian picnickers), and countless incidents alleged to have occurred during Operation Cast Lead which found their way into the Goldstone Report. Hizballah also faked numerous ‘war crimes’, such as the rocketing of a Red Cross ambulance, etc.

So I think I can be excused for wondering how many of the ‘price tag’ actions were actually carried out by Jewish right-wing vandals and how many were ‘Paliwood’ productions. When a mosque was burned in the Arab village of Tuba Zangaria, I wrote this:

In addition to the fact that the act was morally wrong, it was unbelievably stupid. There is still a gag order on details of the case, but I’m sure that when we find them out, we will see that the perpetrator is not the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

The “price tag” attacks are supposed to deter Arabs from vandalism, terrorism and even murder by making them pay a ‘price’. This can’t possibly work, since it simply motivates the Arabs to respond in kind, something they are overjoyed to have an excuse to do.

So the strategy is both wrong and ineffective.

But there’s more:  it’s a huge gift to our enemies in the information war. It provides the grain of truth needed to validate the exaggerations and outright lies that will be told in order to establish that ‘both sides’ are at fault, even that ‘both sides engage in terrorism’.

Since then, several Jewish suspects were arrested and then released for lack of evidence.

Now an independent investigation has raised very serious doubts about the likelihood that ‘settlers’ were responsible for this attack.

It is interesting that in many of these incidents — al-Dura, Gaza Beach, and the mosque arson at Tuba Zangaria — the initial Israeli response was to apologize, before it was certain that Israeli Jews were in fact responsible (or, in the case of al-Dura, before it was known that the event in question had even occurred). What I said some years ago about the al-Dura affair is applicable here as well:

Many [Israelis] have internalized the propaganda of Israel’s enemies. They are prepared to believe that IDF soldiers would continue to fire on a target like al-Dura and his father, who are obviously not firing back and not even armed, for 40 minutes. This is not the same as saying that ‘accidents happen’, it is agreeing that the IDF is either criminally negligent or deliberately murderous, which is what the Arab and European press constantly say.

It seems to me that some Israelis and Jews have a moral inferiority complex. Even though they would not admit this, deep down they are not sure that Israel has a right to exist. Although they understand intellectually that Israel is in a life and death struggle with the Arab world and Iran, emotionally there is a feeling that they are in the wrong.

The ‘Price Tag’ actions do not benefit the ‘settlers’ in any way and they do not help the state. They are, in a sense, ‘too good to be true’ for Israel’s enemies. It is of utmost importance that the perpetrators be caught and exposed, and given the precedent for Arab manipulation of the media, the possibility that Arabs are responsible for many of them must be taken seriously by the police and Shabak.

Update [16 Mar 2012 0826 PDT]: Apparently, some Arab youth are not averse to including “death to Arabs” in Hebrew in their graffiti. Now why would they do that?

Technorati Tags: Israel, Tuba Zangaria mosque, Paliwood

Every so often we hear that Hamas has decided to change its spots:

[Hamas leader Khalid Mashaal and the PLO’s Mahmoud Abbas]  held a November 24 summit meeting in Cairo where they reportedly agreed on main three points: a Palestinian state will be established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip; non-violent resistance will be the tool for achieving this goal; and legislative and presidential elections will take place on May 4, 2012. The first point tacitly acknowledges Israel’s right to exist and the second would align Hamas’ strategy with that of Abbas, who is committed to seeking a negotiated peace with Israel.

Jane’s Defence & Security Intelligence & Analysis was the first to report Hamas’ acceptance to give up armed resistance.

At their latest summit December 21, the two paved the way for Hamas to join the PLO, the Palestinian umbrella organization that to date has been dominated by the Fatah movement. Many observers took that as yet another signs that Hamas is moving to come closer to the Fatah position. — Mohammed Najib, Media Line

If this were true, it might be a problem for Ismail Haniyeh, the ‘Prime Minister’ of the Gaza Strip. Two days before the summit, he gave this speech:

Perhaps he was just out of the loop? I don’t think so. A news release [links in Arabic and translated by Google] issued by Hamas in Gaza today and published in Palestine Today tells us,

Confirmed the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas, on its adherence to the right of resistance in all forms, especially the armed resistance, even defeating the occupation has proven [the] path of resistance and jihad and martyrdom  [are] the only way to extract our rights and liberate our land and our Jerusalem and our holy places…

The Movement stressed the need to continue what has been the achievements on the road to achieving national reconciliation and to end the division and the consolidation of the national front of all forces and factions within the strategy of struggle unified, re-activation of the Palestine Liberation Organization on the basis of protecting the constants and the rights and sanctities, and achieve the aspirations of the Palestinian people for liberation and return.

The movement called  [on the] Arab and Islamic nation to continue its support and assigned to the steadfastness of our people and the valiant resistance, and the defense of Jerusalem and the Aqsa Mosque and the holy sites, and consider the Palestinian issue and the Liberation of Palestine and to address the criminal Zionist enemy …

The translation is slightly rough, but the meaning is clear. Hamas is prepared to join together with the PLO, but only to continue its jihad against the Jewish state. Indeed the idea is to get the PLO back on the jihad bus itself.

Hamas moderating? Nope. As always, reports of Hamas moderation have been greatly exaggerated.

Technorati Tags: Hamas, Khalid Mashaal, Ismail Haniya

I would rather listen to a Hamas spokesman talk about Israel than President Obama or almost any European Union leader. This is because Obama and the Europeans insist that they are concerned with Israel’s security, and then try to force Israel to adopt policies that will wreck it. They cling to the idea that Israeli withdrawals will bring about peace, contrary to historical precedent or reasonable estimates of the intentions of Israel’s enemies. They make my head hurt.

The Hamasnik, on the other hand, does not pretend to care about Israel or Jews, except as targets, and honestly admits his intentions.

What both the Westerner and the Hamasnik don’t realize (or just don’t care about) is that while their policies haven’t resulted — yet — in the demise of the Jewish state, they have created a long and unmitigated disaster for another group that they pretend to be concerned about, the Palestinian Arabs.

The fact that the majority of the descendents of those Arabs who fled Israel in 1948 have been kept in concentration camps since then is not Israel’s fault. It is directly attributable to the inhuman plan of the Arab nations, aided and abetted by the West, who have paid for the unique institution of UNRWA, the UN agency dedicating to perpetuating the ‘refugee problem’. Since this can’t possibly help the ‘refugees’, the only reason for it is to hurt Israel.

Martin Sherman explains:

…the Palestinians are stateless because the Arabs have either stripped them of citizenship they already had, or precluded them from acquiring citizenship they desire to have.

In the “West Bank,” for example, up until 1988, all Palestinians, including the refugees, held Jordanian citizenship. This was annulled by King Hussein when he relinquished his claim to this territory. This abrupt and brusque measure was described by Anis F. Kassim, a prominent Palestinian legal expert, in the following terms: “… more than 1.5 million Palestinians went to bed on 31 July 1988 as Jordanian citizens, and woke up on 1 August 1988 as stateless persons.”

But Palestinians have also been prohibited from acquiring citizenship in their countries of residence in the Arab world, where they have lived for over half a century. The Arab League has instructed its members to deny citizenship to Palestinian Arabs resident within their frontiers, “to avoid dissolution of their identity and protect their right to return to their homeland.”

Thus Arab League spokesman Hisham Youssef conceded in an 2004 interview to the Los Angeles Times that Palestinians in the Arab world live “in very bad conditions,” but added that this official policy is meant “to preserve their Palestinian identity,” which apparently is incapable of existence without coercion. With breathtaking callousness, he went on to assert that “if every Palestinian who sought refuge in a certain country was integrated and accommodated into that country, there won’t be any reason for them to return to Palestine.” Indeed.  — “Note to Newt (Part I): Uninventing Palestinians“

Everyone agrees that the conflict can’t be ended without solving the refugee problem. It should be obvious that an American/European style ‘two-state solution’, even if it explicitly calls for Arab ‘refugees’ to settle in the new state of ‘Palestine’ rather than Israel, cannot do so. Such a state would in effect be one big refugee camp, with several million Arabs that have no economic outlet seething in a pot next door to Israel, waiting for the opportunity to overrun it. A Gaza strip on steroids.

The PLO version of the ‘two-state solution’ is even worse, since it will not take in any ‘refugees’ — they can only go to Israel in the PLO plan! I’ve called this the ‘two Arab state solution’.

There is a way to solve the refugee problem, and the Isareli-Arab conflict as well. The only difficulty is that so many people are stuck on the American/European two-state non-solution, or the Arab ‘Israel gone’ solution that they won’t listen. Although this plan would provide security for Israel and a decent life for Palestinian Arabs, I expect howls of outrage from the Left and the Arab camp, since they don’t want either of the above.

Sherman spells it out with a three part plan. Abolish UNRWA, end discrimination against Palestinian Arabs in host countries (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan), and finally — the most contentious part:

While the first two elements of the proposed solution are directed toward addressing the plight of the Palestinians in the Arab world, this measure is aimed at those in Israeli-administered areas.

It involves allowing individual Palestinians free choice in charting their future and that of their families.

These efforts should focus on two elements: (a) Generous monetary compensation to effect the relocation and rehabilitation of the Palestinian Arabs residents in territories across the 1967 Green Line, presumably mostly – but not necessarily exclusively – in the Arab/Muslim countries.

(b) “Atomization” of the implementation by making the offer of compensation and relocation directly to the breadwinners and family heads, and not through any Palestinian organization that may have a vested interest in thwarting the initiative.  — “Note to Newt (Part II): Rethinking Palestine“

Talk about howls of outrage, this will do it. I’m sure Sherman has already been greeted with accusations of racism, Hitlerism, genocidal intent, etc. Nevertheless, it seems to me the only one of the recent plans — the Obama plan, the Arab Initiative, etc. — that promises an actual solution.

Sherman’s articles represent a breakthrough in the direction of reason and humanity. The chance of anyone with the power to implement them taking them seriously is small.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Palestinians, Arab refugees